Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Exploring Societal and Ethical Views of Nanotechnology REUs

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
NanoEthics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Little previous research has examined attitudes about societal and ethical issues (SEI) among interns participating in research experience for undergraduate programs (REUs) in nanotechnology, thus neglecting an important population for understanding the burgeoning views of the next generation of nanotechnology researchers. This study surveyed a sample of interns (N = 85) participating in the National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network’s (NNIN) REU program during the summer of 2012. Our questions focused on interns’ experiences with education on ethical issues, as well as their attribution of responsibility for considering ethical issues, motivations to talk about ethical issues, and comfort level of discussing ethical issues with faculty, mentors, lab staff, and other REU students. Among key findings was that lab culture related to the extent to which REU interns felt comfortable discussing ethical issues. In addition, those who reported more discussions about ethical issues with their mentors were more likely to consider themselves as responsible for considering ethical issues. We conclude with recommendations and future research directions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. ABET (2013) Criteria for accrediting engineering programs. Retrieved on July 16, 2013, from: http://www.abet.org/uploadedFiles/Accreditation/Accreditation_Step_by_Step/Accreditation_Documents/Current/2013_-_2014/eac-criteria-2013-2014.pdf

  2. Acharya M, Davis M, Weil V (1995) Integrating ethics into a research experience for undergraduates. J Eng Educ 84(2):129–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Adams JS, Tashchian A, Shore TH (1999) Frequency, recall and usefulness of undergraduate ethics education. Teach Bus Ethics 3(3):241–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Armstrong MB, Ketz JE, Owsen D (2003) Ethics education in accounting: moving toward ethical motivation and ethical behavior. J Account Educ 21(1):1–16. doi:10.1016/S0748-5751(02)00017-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Barakat N, Jiao H (2010) Proposed strategies for teaching ethics of nanotechnology. Nanoethics 4:221–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bassett DR (2012) Notions of identity, society, and rhetoric in a speech code of science among scientists and engineers working in nanotechnology. Sci Commun 34(1):115–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Berne RW (2005) Nanotalk: conversations with scientists and engineers about ethics, meaning, and belief in the development of nanotechnology. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah

    Book  Google Scholar 

  8. Berne RW, Schummer J (2005) Teaching societal and ethical implications of nanotechnology to engineering students through science fiction. Bull Sci Technol Soc 25:459–468. doi:10.1177/0270467605283048

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Cobb MD, Macoubrie J (2004) Public perceptions about nanotechnology: risks, benefits and trust. J Nanoparticle Res 6:395–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Cruz JA, Frey WJ (2003) An effective strategy for integrating ethics across the curriculum in engineering: an ABET 2000 challenge. Sci Eng Ethics 9(4):543–568

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Cvetkovich G, Winter PL (2003) Trust and social representations of the management of threatened and endangered species. Environ Behav 35(2):286–307. doi:10.1177/0013916502250139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Davies SR (2008) Constructing communication talking to scientists about talking to the public. Sci Commun 29(4):413–434

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Earle TC, Cvetkovich GT (1995) Social trust: toward a cosmopolitan society. Praeger, Westport

    Google Scholar 

  14. Evans FJ, Marcal LE (2005) Educating for ethics: business deans’ perspectives. Bus Soc Rev 110(3):233–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Fisher E (2007) Ethnographic intervention: probing the capacity of laboratory decisions. Nanoethics. doi:10.1007/s11569-007-0016-5

    Google Scholar 

  16. Hilgartner S, Bosk CL (1988) The rise and fall of social problems: a public arenas model. Am J Sociol 53–78

  17. Hirsch PL, Linsenmeier JAW, Smith HT, Walker JMT (2005) Enhancing core competency learning in an integrated summer research experience for bioengineers. J Eng Educ 94(4):391–401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Lee CJ, Scheufele DA, Lewenstein BV (2005) Public attitudes towards emerging technologies: examining the interactive effects of cognitions and affect on public attitudes towards nanotechnology. Sci Commun 27:240–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Lincort J, Johnson R (2004) Ethics training: a genuine dilemma for engineering educators. Sci Eng Ethics 10:353–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Macoubrie J (2006) Nanotechnology: public concerns, reasoning and trust in government. Public Underst Sci 15(2):221–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. McComas KA (2012) Researcher views about funding sources and conflicts of interest in nanotechnology. Sci Eng Ethics 18(4):699–717. doi:10.1007/s11948-011-9264-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. McGinn R (2008) Ethics and nanotechnology: views of nanotechnology researchers. Nanoethics 2:101–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. McGregor J, Wetmore JM (2009) Researching and teaching the ethics and social implications. Nanoethics 3:17–30. doi:10.1007/s11569-009-0055-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. National Science Foundation. National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network Program Solicitation. Retrieved on March 12, 2013, from: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2003/nsf03519/nsf03519.html?org=NSF

  25. NNIN. Research Experience for Undergraduates (REU). Retrieved on April 15, 2013, from: http://www.nnin.org/research-experience-undergraduates

  26. NNIN. Societal and ethical issues: Orientation video. Retrived on February 7, 2014, http://www.nnin.org/news-events/video-gallery/nnin-sei-training-video-2012

  27. Rabins MJ (1998) Teaching engineering ethics to undergraduates: why? what? how? Sci Eng Ethics 4(3):291–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Rest J (1986) Moral development: Advances in research and theory. Praeger, New York (1986)

  29. Savadori L, Savio S, Nicotra E, Rumiati R, Finucane M, Slovic P (2004) Expert and public perception of risk from biotechnology. Risk Anal 24(5):1289–1299. doi:10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00526.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Scheufele DA, Lewenstein BV (2005) The public and nanotechnology: how citizens make sense of emerging technologies. J Nanoparticle Res 7:659–667

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Schuubiers D (2011) What happens in the lab does not stay in the lab: applying midstream modulation to enhance critical reflection in the laboratory. Sci Eng Ethics 17(4):769–788

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Siegrist M (2000) The influence of trust and perception of risk and benefits on the acceptance of gene technology. Risk Anal 20:195–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Siegrist M (1999) A causal model explaining the perception and acceptance of gene technology. J Appl Soc Psychol 29:2093–2106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Siegrist M, Cvetkovich G (2000) Perception of hazards: the role of social trust and knowledge. Risk Anal 20:713–719

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Siegrist M, Cvetkovich G, Gutscher H (2002) Risk preference predictions and gender stereotypes. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 87:91–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Sjöberg L (2001) Limits of knowledge and the limited importance of trust. Risk Anal 21:189–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Slovic P (1993) Perceived risk, trust, and democracy. Risk Anal 13(6):675–682

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Sweeney A (2006) Social and ethical dimensions of nanoscale science and engineering research. Sci Eng Ethics 12(3):435–464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Thorne L (1998) The role of virtue in auditors’ ethical decision making an integration of cognitive-developmental and virtue-ethics perspectives. Res Account Ethics 4:291–308

    Google Scholar 

  40. Vandermoere F, Blanchemanche S, Bieberstein A, Marette S, Roosen J (2011) The public understanding of nanotechnology in the food domain: the hidden role of views on science, technology, and nature. Public Underst Sci 20(2):195–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. ECS-0335765. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Communication, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 14850, USA

    Gina M. Eosco, Meghnaa Tallapragada & Katherine A. McComas

  2. Bates College, Lewiston, ME, USA

    Merrill Brady

Authors
  1. Gina M. Eosco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Meghnaa Tallapragada
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Katherine A. McComas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Merrill Brady
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gina M. Eosco.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Eosco, G.M., Tallapragada, M., McComas, K.A. et al. Exploring Societal and Ethical Views of Nanotechnology REUs. Nanoethics 8, 91–99 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-014-0192-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-014-0192-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation